1. Field of Endeavor
The present invention relates to explosives and more particularly to testing for the presence of explosives.
2. State of Technology
U.S. Pat. No. 5,638,166 for an apparatus and method for rapid detection of explosives residue from the deflagration signature thereof issued Jun. 10, 1997 to Herbert O. Funsten and David J. McComas and assigned to The Regents of the University of California provides the following state of the art information, “Explosives are a core component of nuclear, biological, chemical and conventional weapons, as well as of terrorist devices such as car, luggage, and letter bombs. Current methods for detecting the presence of explosives include vapor detection, bulk detection, and tagging. However, these methods have significant difficulties dependent upon the nature of the signature that is detected. See Fetterolf et al., Portable Instrumentation: New Weapons in the War Against Drugs and Terrorism,” Proc. SPIE 2092 (1993) 40, Yinon and Zitrin, in Modern Methods and Applications in Analysis of Explosions, (Wiley, New York, 1993) Chap. 6; and references therein. Vapor detection is achieved using trained animals, gas chromatography, ion mobility mass spectrometry, and bioluminescence, as examples. All of these techniques suffer from the inherently low vapor pressures of most explosives. Bulk detection of explosives may be performed using x-ray imaging which cannot detect the explosives themselves, but rather detects metallic device components. Another method for bulk detection involves using energetic x-rays to activate nitrogen atoms in the explosives, thereby generating positrons which are detected. This technique requires an x-ray generator and a minimum of several hundred grams of explosives. Bulk detection is also accomplished using thermal neutron activation which requires a source of neutrons and a .gamma.-radiation detector. Thus, bulk detection is not sensitive to trace quantities of explosives and requires large, expensive instrumentation. Tagging requires that all explosives be tagged with, for example, an easily detected vapor. However, since tagging is not mandatory in the United States, this procedure is clearly not reliable. It turns out that there are no technologies for performing accurate, real-time (<6 sec) detection and analysis of trace explosives in situ. Only trained dogs can achieve this goal.
It is known that surfaces in contact with explosives (for example, during storage, handling, or device fabrication) will readily become contaminated with explosive particulates as a result of their inherent stickiness. This phenomenon is illustrated in studies that show large persistence of explosives on hands, even after several washings (J. D. Twibell et al., “Transfer of Nitroglycerine to Hands During Contact with Commercial Explosives,” J. Forensic Science 27 (1982) 783; J. D. Twibell et al., “The Persistence of Military Explosives on Hands,” J. Forensic Science 29 (1984) 284). Furthermore, cross contamination in which a secondary surface is contaminated by contact with a contaminated primary surface can also readily occur. For example, a measurable amount of ammonium nitrate (AN) residue has been found on the lease documents for a rental truck, and significant amounts of the explosives PETN (pentaerythritol tetranitrate) and/or AN have been found on clothing and inside vehicles of suspects in two well-publicized bombings. Therefore, explosive residue will likely persist in large amounts on the explosive packaging and environs, as well as on the individuals involved in building the explosive device, which can provide an avenue for detection of the presence of explosives.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,679,584 for a method for chemical detection issued Oct. 2, 1997 to Daryl Sunny Mileaf and Noe Esau Rodriquez, II provides the following state of the art information, “a method for detecting a target substance which includes collecting a substance sample; introducing the substance sample into a substance card having at least one preselected reagent responsive to the presence of the target substance and having a light-transmissive chamber; and inserting the substance card into a substance detector device having a photosensor and adapted to receive the substance card. Once the substance detector card has been inserted into the substance detector, the method continues by mixing the substance sample with the preselected reagents for a preselected mixing period, thus producing a measurand having a target substance reaction.”
U.S. Pat. No. 6,470,730 for a dry transfer method for the preparation of explosives test samples issued Oct. 29, 2002 to Robert T. Chamberlain and assigned to The United States of America as represented by the Secretary of Transportation provides the following state of the art information, “ . . . method of preparing samples for testing explosive and drug detectors of the type that search for particles in air. A liquid containing the substance of interest is placed on a flexible Teflon® surface and allowed to dry, then the Teflon® surface is rubbed onto an item that is to be tested for the presence of the substance of interest. The particles of the substance of interest are transferred to the item but are readily picked up by an air stream or other sampling device and carried into the detector.”